
Class. 



X* 

'X* 
*x* 

»X rt 



LECTURE 



& CONTROVERSY 8 



e>X» 
<X? 

*x* 
*x 
*x* 
*x* 

*X* 

*x 
*x> 
x* 
«x> 
*x» 
*x* 

X* 

'X* 

*x* 

X* 

•x?> 



PENNSYLVANIA AND VIRGINIA, 



iDOVT TIIK 




A. JK C TIKE 



i mv THE 



CONTROVERSY 



PENNSYLVANIA AND VIRGINIA, 



BOUNDARY LINE: 



DELIVERED AT THE UNIVERSITY BL'ILDIXG, DECEMBER 5th, 1813. 




NEVILLE B. CRAIG, 

Corresponding Secretary of the Historical Society of Western Pennsylvania. 



PITTSBURGH: 

KIM I |i \A \. I \\ Nl>— i K\NM IN 1 1 IAD— OPPOSITE POST-OFFICE. 

1 8 l 3. 



1<J. 









f - I U ( it 



LECTUR E, 



Ladies and Gentlemen: — 

Of the large and respectable audience now assembled 
here, there is perhaps not one individual who has not read the history 
of the rise and progress of Rome, of the increase of her power and 
of the gradual extension of her boundary, so as first to embrace the 
petty domains of her neighbors; then all Italy, and finally that vast 
territory which extends from the Western Ocean to the Euphrates, 
and from Mount Atlas to the Danube and the mountains of Caledonia. 
The history of that haughty nation which fought and conquered two 
thousand years ago, and at the distance of many thousand miles from 
us, is familiar to our school-boys; and yet it is probable that there are 
now present some intelligent persons who are not aware that an angry 
controversy raged, not more than seventy years ago, between Penn- 
sylvanians and Virginians, for the territory in and around this city. 
A still larger number, no doubt, are uninformed as to the origin of 
that controversy, the grounds of the claims of the different parties, 
and the mode and the terms of the final arrangement. That there 
should be a want of general, correct information, is not, under the cir- 
cumstances, very remarkable. The controversy commenced while 
these States were colonies; the terms of the compromise were agreed 
upon during our struggle for independence, and attracted less attention 
among the more exciting events of the war of the Revolution. Since 
that time, so far as my research has extended, no full and accurate 
notice of the controversy has been published. Mr. Barton, in his 
Memoirs of Rittenhouse, has several references to the matter; and the 
late Judge Brackenridge, in his Law Miscellanies, has a short chapter 
devoted to the subject. But both those writers have permitted some 
errors to find places in their publications. It has occurred to me that 
a plain, unvarnished history of a controversy about the very soil upon 
which we stand, would not be less interesting to the audience now- 
assembled, than even a more ornate notice of some ancient or far- 
distant nation. 



I proceed, therefore, to give a eerj plain, though, I trust, accurate 
account of that dispute, and shall laboT to make it as intelligible, as 
the fear of being tedious will permit. In the year 1606, James the 

First granted to the London and Plymouth Companies the privilege 
of making two settlements on any part of the coast of America) 
between the thirty-fourth and forty-fifth degrees of North latitude, 
the whole of which country was called Virginia. Under this grant, 
the former Company made a settlement at Jamestown, and thus 
became entitled, under the terms of the grant, to territory one hun- 
dred miles square. 

Considering this extent of territory too contracted for their pur- 
poses, the Company applied for a further enlargement of their grant) 
and in 1609. an additional grant was made to them in the following 
terms: — "All those lands, countries and territories, situate, lying and 
being in that part of America called Virginia, from the Point of 
land called Point Comfort, all along the sea-coast to the Northward 
two hundred miles, and from the said Point Comfort, to the South- 
ward, two hundred miles, and all that space and circuit of land 
lying from the sea-coast of the precinct aforesaid, up into the land 
throughout, from sea to sea, West and North-West." 

In 1623, a Writ of Quo Warranto was issued against the Com- 
pany from the Court of King's Bench, which was decided against 
it the next year. By this decision, the Company was dissolved, 
and the land within the limits of the grant, with the exception 
of such tracts as had been granted to settlers, reverted to the Crown. 
Against this decision the Company seems never to have made any 
objection. 

In 1632, Charles the First granted to Lord Baltimore, the present 
territory of Maryland, which greatly encroached upon the bounds of 
the grant to the London Company: yet against this grant neither 
that Company nor the Colonial Legislature made any opposition. 
This is only material in this place, as showing the submission of 
those interested, and as proving that the decision on the Quo War- 
ranto was acquiesced in as legal. 

In 1680, the grant was made to William Pcnn, of "All that tract 
or part of land in America, with all the islands therein contained, 
as the same is bounded on the East by Delaware river, from twelve 
miles Northward of New Castletown, unto the three and fortieth 
degree of Northern latitude, if the said river doth extend so far North- 
wards; but if the .said river shall not extend so far Northwards, then 



by ihe said rivet so fat as it does extend; and from the head of the 
said river, the Eastern bounds arc to be determined by a meridian 
line to be drawn from the head of said river unto the said three and 
fortieth degree. The said hauls to extend Westward Jive degrees 
in longitude, to be computed from the said Eastern bounds; and 
the said land to be bounded on the North by the beginning of the 
three and fortieth degree of Northern latitude, and on the South by 
a circle drawn at twelve miles distance from New Castle, North- 
ward and Westward, unto the beginning of the, fortieth </ 

Northern latitude, and then by a straight line Westward to the limits 
of longitude above mentioned." 

Id this description of the territory granted to Penn, there is no 
vagueness or uncertainty, except in one particular, and that as to the 
Western boundary. The words are, "Said lands to extend TVest- 
ward five degrees in longitude, to be computed from the said 
Eastern bounds." Now as the Eastern "bounds" is the Dela- 
ware river, which in its meandering course varies its longitude more 
titan forty miles, the questions soon occurred, from what point on 
the Delaware shall the five degrees of longitude be computed.' shall 
the Western boundary be a meridian, or shall it be a crooked line 
corresponding to the curves of the Delaware, and distant from it five 
degrees of longitude at every corresponding point? These and other 
questions would naturally occur, in interpreting the words defining 
the Western boundaries of Pennsylvania. 

I have before mentioned that the territory of Virginia, as granted 
to the London Company, with the exception of land actually granted 
to settlers, had reverted to the Crown by the judgment on the Writ 
of Quo Warranto. I have also stated that in 1(532, forty-eight 
years before the grant was made to Penn, Maryland was granted 
to Lord Baltimore. In the latter grant, the Northern boundary is a 
right-line drawn from thai part of the Delaware Bay which lieth 
under the fortieth degree of latitude, due West to the meridian of 
the first fountain of the river Potomac. Here, then, is an inter- 
ference of boundary lines between Penn and Lord Baltimore. Penn 
had a grant to the beginning of the fortieth degree of North latitude; 
while Baltimore had a gran) to pass beyond the beginning of that 
degree, and to extend some indefinite distance under it. In 1 ?<>!). 
after 8 long and vexatious controversy, the boundary was fixed at 
latitude li'.i 1M 12 being the line so famous in late days, as Mason 
and Dixon's line. But although the prior charter to Lord Baltimore 



prevailed over the later grant to Perm, throughout the entire length 
of the province of Maryland, there was no good reason why the 
South boundary of Pennsylvania, West of Maryland, should not con- 
form to the charter, and extend South to latitude thirty-nine degrees, 
being the beginning of the fortieth degree. The grant to the London 
Company having been annulled, and the territory included in it hav- 
ing reverted to the Crown, there was no dispute between rival 
Grantees, as in the case of Maryland; no question about priority of 
grants: but the simple point to be settled was this, — does the charter 
to Penn include the territory in dispute? 

Having thus made such preliminary remarks as were necessary 
o render the controversy between Virginia and Pennsylvania easily 
intelligible, I will proceed to the account of that matter. 

In 1752, the Proprietors of Pennsylvania understanding that the 
Governor of Virginia was about to erect a Fort at the Forks of the 
Ohio, now Pittsburgh, to repel the incursions of the French, in- 
structed their Governor, Hamilton, to render any assistance in his 
power, taking, however, an acknowledgment from Virginia, that any 
settlement made should not be construed to the prejudice of the 
right of the Penns. Of these instructions, Gov. Hamilton imme- 
diately gave Gov. Dinwiddie notice. Nearly two years later, in 
1754, Gov. Dinwiddie being prepared to commence building the 
Fort at the Forks, issued a proclamation promising to lay out two 
hundred thousand acres of land, in and near this place, to be divided 
among those who would enlist in the service against the French. 
Upon receiving a copy of this proclamation, Gov. Hamilton, on the 
13th of March, 1754, wrote to Gov. Dinwiddie, reminding him of 
his former intimation respecting the lands, and requesting such an 
acknowledgment as the Proprietaries had before suggested. 

On the 21st of March, 1754, Gov. Dinwiddie replied: in his letter 
he said, "I am much misled by our Surveyors, if the Forks of the 
Monongahela be within the limits of your Proprietaries' grant. I 
have for some time written home, to have the line run, — to have the 
boundaries properly known, &c. In the mean time, that no hinder- 
ance may be given to our intended expedition, it is highly reasonable, 
if these lands are in your Proprietor's grant, that the settlers should 
pay the quit-rent to Mr. Penn, and not to His Majesty. And there- 
fore, as far as in my power lies, I agree thereto, after the time granted 
by my proclamation, to he clear of quit-rent, ceases." 

These proceedings (1752, '64) were the first acts by the provincial 



orovernment of Virginia, m which any jurisdiction was claimed over 
the Western Territory; and, as is above stated, they were promptly 
met by Gov. Hamilton; so that there was not the slightest shadow of 
ground for the allegation of acquiescence, as subsequently made by 
Lord Dunmore. 

Within a month after Mr. Dinwiddie's last letter to Gov. Hamilton 
was written, Monsieur Contrecceur, at the head of a large number of 
French and Indians, descended the Allegheny river from Fort Ve- 
nango,— captured Ensign Ward, with his little band of forty men, — 
and took formal possession of the country around the head of the 
Ohio. Subsequently, followed Washington's first campaign, from 
Fort Cumberland towards the Monongahela; and finally, his surren- 
der to the French at Fort Necessity on the fourth day of July, 1754. 
From that date the French remained in possession of the country 
around the head of the Ohio ; and all settlements, by English or 
Americans, were prevented, until Gen. Forbes, in November, 1758, 
drove the enemy from Fort Duquesne, and took possession of the 
country. From that time until 1774, no difficulty occurred between 
Virginia and Pennsylvania, in relation to the boundary. The lands 
in the neighborhood of Pittsburgh were surveyed for the Proprie- 
taries early in 1769; magistrates were appointed in the beginning of 
1771, and entered upon, and continued in the exercise of their duties 
for some time, without molestation. As the difficulties, however, be- 
tween the mother country and the colonies increased, the British gov- 
ernment deemed it advisable to order the abandonment of Fort Pitt, 
and the withdrawal of the troops from this place. The Fort being 
thus abandoned, one John Connolly, a man of much energy and tal- 
ent, but without principle, came here from Virginia, about the end of 
the year 1773 or beginning of '74, having authority from Lord Dun- 
more, Governor of that State, took possession of the Fort, calling it 
Fort Dunmore; and as Captain Commandant of the Militia, issued 
his proclamation, calling on the people to meet him, as a Militia, on 
the 25th January, 1774. For so doing, Arthur St. Clair, one of the 
magistrates of Westmoreland county, Pennsylvania, issued a warrant 
against him, and had him committed to the jail at Hanna's town, the 
seat of Justice of Westmoreland county, which embraced this place; 
from which, however, he was soon released, by entering bail for his 
appearance at Court. 

Information of these transactions was transmitted to the Governor, 
John Penn, by express, who, on tlir .'Ust of January, 1774, wrote a 



8 

letter to Lord Dunmore, urging him to refrain from appointing officers 
at Pittsburgh, and suffer matters to remain afl they were, until a tempo- 
rary Boundary-line could be run by Commissioners to be appointed 
by both governments. This letter has never, to my knowledge, ap- 
peared in print; the copy which I hold in my hand, having been pro- 
cured by me from the office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth. 
The following portion of it will be found interesting, as showing the 
measures adopted by Mr. John Penn, to ascertain whether Pittsburgh 
was within the chartered limits of Pennsylvania. 

"The Western Extent of the Province of Pennsylvania, by the 
Royal Grant, is five degrees of Longitude from the River Delaware, 
which is its Eastern boundary. In die year 1768, an East and West 
line was run from Delaware, at the mouth of Christiana Creek, to the 
crossing of Dunkard Creek, a branch of the Monongahela, by Messrs. 
Dixon and Mason, two Surveyors of distinction, who were sent over 
from England to run the Division-Line between Maryland and Penn- 
sylvania. These Artists fixed the Latitude and Extent of that Line 
with the utmost exactness and precision, — to the satisfaction of the 
Commissioners on both sides. 

" From the 233d Mile-stone on this Line, a North Line hath since 
been carefully run and measured to the Ohio: and from thence up to 
Fort Pitt, the several courses of the river have been taken with all 
possible care. From the line of Dixon and Mason, to a known point 
in the South line of the city of Philadelphia, the true course and dis- 
tance hath been discovered by actual survey, as also from the point 
aforesaid to that part of the river Delaware which is in the same lati- 
tude as Fort Pitt; and from these several data, the most exact calcu- 
lations have been made by Dr. Smith, Provost of our College. — Mi. 
Rittenhouse, and our Surveyor General — in order to ascertain the dif- 
ference of longitude between Delaware and Pittsburgh; who all agree, 
that the latter is near six miles Eastward of the Jf'estern extent 
of the Province. 

"The better to illustrate this matter, and enable your Lordship to 
form a judgment of the accuracy with which the work has been done 
and the calculations made, I have enclosed a map or draught of the 
several lines above mentioned, with explanatory notes, as delivered 
by them to me." 

The conclusion arrived at by the calculations of Messrs. Ritten- 
house, Smith and Lukens, that Pittsburgh was "near six mile- 



wiihm" the boundary claimed by John Penn, proves to be remarka- 
bly accurate. 

Indeed, .so far as I can judge by the best Maps of the State, I 
presume Penn's curved line, parallel to the Delaware, would cross 
the Ohio river between five and six miles below this city. 

How strongly does this accuracy of John Penn contrast with the 
vague, rash and unfounded claim set up by Lord Dunmore, in his 
correspondence with Messrs. Tilghman and Allen, as will be imme- 
diately related. 

The Map referred to in John Penn's letter, could not be found 
at Harrisburgh, though diligent search was made, and though I have 
some time since applied to a friend at Richmond, I have not suc- 
ceeded in obtaining a copy. 

To the letter of John Penn, Lord Dunmore replied on the 3d of 
March, 1774: he contended that in 1753, '54, Pennsylvania had ad- 
mitted the better title of Virginia to the country in dispute; declared 
that he could not defer the appointment of such other officers as 
may be deemed necessary for the good government of this section 
of country, and insisted that Mr. St. Clair should be punished by 
dismissal from office, unless he could prevail upon Connolly to 
apply for his pardon. 

Gov. Penn, in his reply, dated March 31st, contended that the Pro- 
prietary of Pennsylvania had not admitted the claim of Virginia to be 
good, but had expressly denied it. He also thus states the claim of 
the Proprietaries of Pennsylvania: — "The Proprietaries of Pennsyl- 
vania do claim, as part of their province, all the lands lying West of a 
South line to be drawn from Mason and Dixon's line, as it is com- 
monly called, at the Western-most part of the province of Maryland, 
to the beginning of the fortieth degree of North latitude, to the 
extent of five degrees of longitude from the Delaware." 

The Governor also declined to remove Mr. St. Clair, whom he 
pronounced to be an honest, worthy man, who had served His 
Majesty in the Regulars, with reputation. It may be as well to 
mention here, that this Mr. St. Clair is the same person who has 
long since been well known as Gen. St. Clair, and who was almost 
equally distinguished by his talents, social virtues, services and hard 
fortune. 

While this correspondence was passing between Mr. Penn and 
Lord Dunmore, Connolly had gone to Staunton, and was sworn 



10 

in as a Justice of the Peace, of Augusta county, Virginia, in which, 
it was alleged, the country around Pittsburgh was embraced. To- 
wards the latter part of March, he returned to this place, with both 
civil and military authority, to put the laws of Virginia in force 
About the fifth of April, the Court assembled at I lamia's town, the 
seat of Justice for Westmoreland county, Pennsylvania. Soon after, 
Connolly, with about one hundred and fifty men, all armed and with 
colors Hying, appeared there; placed sentinels at the door of the 
Court-house, who refused to admit the magistrates, unless with the 
consent of their commander. A meeting then took place between 
Connolly and the magistrates, in which the former stated that he had 
come there in fulfilment of his promise to the Sheriff; but denied 
the authority of the Court, and declared that the magistrates had no 
right to hold a Court. He added, however, that to prevent confu- 
sion, he agreed that the magistrates might act as a Court in all 
matters which might be submitted to them by the acquiescence of 
the people, until he should receive instructions to the contrary. To 
this the magistrates replied, that their authority rested on the legis- 
lative authority of Pennsylvania; that it had been regularly exercised; 
that they would continue to exercise it in the same regular manner, 
and that they would do all in their power to preserve the public 
tranquillity. They added, in conclusion, an assurance that the pro- 
vince of Pennsylvania would use every exertion to accommodate 
differences, by fixing a temporary boundary until the true one could 
be ascertained. 

On the eighth of April, the Justices, iEneas Mackay, Devereux 
Smith, and Andrew M'Farlanc, returned from the Court to Pitts- 
burgh, where they resided, and on the next day they were arrested 
by Connolly's Sheriff, and on refusing to give bail, were sent off 
under guard to Staunton, in Virginia. After traveling one day to- 
gether, Mr. Mackay got permission to go by the way of Williams- 
burgh to see Lord Dunmore; and after some conversation with him, 
his Lordship wrote to the Sheriff requesting him to permit the 
prisoners to return home, and saying, "I will be answerable for their 
appearance, in case it be required." Mackay immediately proceeded 
1o Staunton; and in a letter dated at that place, on the fifth of May, 
he informed Gov. Penn that he and his fellow-prisoners were to set 
out on their homeward journey, forthwith. On the 19th day of 
April, intelligence of the arrest of the Justices reached the Governor; 



11 

ami on the 21st, at a meeting of the Council, it was determined to 
send two Commissioners tu Virginia, to represent to the government 
there, the ill consequences which may ensue il" an immediate stop be 
not put to the disorders which then existed in the West, and to con- 
sult upon the most proper means for establishing peace and good 
order in that quarter. 

James Tilghman and Andrew Allen were appointed, with instruc- 
tions, first, to request the Governor of Virginia to unite with the 
Proprietaries of Pennsylvania to petition His Majesty in Council, to 
appoint Commissioners to run the boundary-line; the expense to be 
equally borne by the two Colonies; second, to use every exertion 
to induce the Governor to agree to some temporary line; but in no 
event to assent to any line which would give Virginia jurisdiction of 
the country on the East side of the Monongahela river. 

The Commissioners arrived at Williamsburgh on the 19th of May, 
and on the 21st had an oral conference with the Governor; in which 
he expressed his willingness to join in an application to (lie Kino - , to 
appoint Commissioners to settle the boundary; but also declared, that 
Virginia would defray no part of the expense. As to the temporary 
line, he desired the Commissioners to make their propositions in 
writing. 

In compliance with this request, they, on the 23d, addressed him a 
letter containing the following proposition: — "That a survey be taken 
by Surveyors, to be appointed by the two Governments, with as 
much accuracy as may serve the present purpose, of the courses of 
the Delaware, from the mouth of Christiana creek, or near it, where 
Mason and Dixon's line intersects the Delaware, to that part of said 
river which lies in the latitude of Fort Pitt, and as much farther as 
may be needful for the present purpose. That the line of Mason and 
Dixon be extended to the distance of five degrees of longitude from 
the Delaware; and that from the end of said five degrees, a line or 
lines, corresponding to the courses of the Delaware, be run to the 
river Ohio, as nearly as may he, at the distance of five decrees from 
said river in every part." And that the extension of Mason and 
Dixon's line, and the line or lines corresponding to the courses of the 
Delaware, be taken as the line of jurisdiction, until the boundary can 
be run and settled by Royal authority. 

Lord Dunmore, in his reply, dated 24th May, contended that the 
Western boundary could not he of '-such an inconvenient and difficult 



12 

to be ascertained shape," as it would he it' made to correspond to 1 1 1* - 
courses of the Delaware. He thought that ii should lie a meridian 
line, at the distance of five degrees from the Delaware, in the forty 

second degree of latitude. 

He then, after some arguments which it is unnecessary to recite, 
remarked, that unless the Commissioners could propose some plan 
that favored as much the sentiments of the government of Virginia as 
of Pennsylvania, he saw that no accommodation could be entered into 
previous to the King's decision. The Commissioners, in their reply 
of the 26th, say, that for the purpose of producing harmony and 
peace, "we shall be willing to recede from our Charter bounds, so far 
as to make the river Monongahela, from the line of Mason and Dix- 
on, the Western boundary of jurisdiction, which would at once settle 
our present dispute, without the great trouble and expense of running 
lines, or the inconvenience of keeping the jurisdiction in suspense." 

On the same day. Lord Dunmore replied in a long letter, manifes- 
ting throughout a most uncourteous and rude spirit. The following 
are the most material passages, showing, as they do, that further cor- 
respondence with him was utterly useless: — 

"And what were your proposals to reconcile these difficulties? 
Why, in your first, you propose that every thing shall he given up to 
Pennsylvania; and in your second, that Virginia shall be content, 
without having any thing given up to it: at least, I can find nothing 
given up by your proposal of the Monongahela, &c. What else then 
can I conclude, but that no real intention is meant to avoid the great 
and reciprocal inconveniences of a doubtful boundary," &c. Further 
on he says, — "Your resolution, with respect to Fort Pitt, (the juris- 
diction over which place, I must tell you, at all events, icill not be 
relinquished by this Government, without His Majesty's orders,) 
puts an entire stop to further treaty." 

On the 27th, the Commissioners, in a brief reply, state, that the 
determination of his Lordship not to relinquish Fort Pitt, puts a pe- 
riod to the treaty. 

After a careful perusal of this correspondence, and an attentive con- 
sideration of Lord Dunmore's conduct in 1774 and 1775, the conclu- 
sion is forced upon the mind, that he was a very weak and arbitrary 
man, or else that the suspicion, then entertained, that he wished to 
promote ill will and hostility between the Pennsylvanians and Vir- 
ginians, as well as between the Indians and whites, was well founded. 



13 

During ilio whole of tins correspondence, this place was called Fort 
Pitt; the new name of I'm! Dun more was never mentioned. The 
Commissioners, in their first letter, gave it the old name, and Dun- 
more did the same in Ins letters to them; although he had before 
recognized the new name bestowed by Connolly. 

This negotiation having thus failed, Connolly continued to domi- 
neer with a high-hand at Fort Pitt. In a letter from iEneas Mackay 
to Governor Penn, dated June Hth, 1774, we find the following 
strono - and emphatic language: — "The deplorable state of affairs In 
this part of your government, is truly distressing. We are robbed, 
insulted and dragooned by Connolly and his militia, in this place and 
its environs." 

To form an adequate conception of the condition of the inhabitants 
in this place, at that time, we must take into view, not only the op- 
pressive conduct of Connolly, but also bear in mind that the war" of 
the Revolution was rapidly approaching, and that hostilities between 
the Indians and Virginians, were actually raging at that time. The 
Indians, it is true, were understood to say that they would not touch 
the Pennsylvanians; but still they must have felt much of the em- 
barrassments arising out 0/ the Indian war. So great was the anxiety 
and distress of the adherents of the Proprietary, that they at one time 
thought seriously of leaving this place, and removing to Kittanning, 
which lay in another manor. Another project was, to raise a stockade 
around the town of Pittsburgh, being that part of our city which lies 
between Water and Second Streets, and Market and Ferry streets. 
Neither project was carried into execution, and I merely refer to 
them as signs of the times, and as evidences of the state of feeling 
then prevailing here. 

On the 8th of September, the Earl of Dartmouth, one of the Secre- 
taries of State, wrote a letter to Lord Dunmorc, containing some items 
of intelligence, in relation to this place, which are of interest as form- 
ing a part of the history of Fort Pitt, and of the controversy. After 
stating that the Governor of Pennsylvania had attributed the hostility 
of the Indians, to the unprovoked attacks upon them by the Virgin- 
tans, and had also alleged that a party of Virginians had attacked and 
wounded some Indians, who, at the risk of their lives, had escorted 
some traders to Pittsburgh, he proceeds to say, — '-My intelligence, 
through a variety of other channels, confirms these fat ts." He fur- 
ther adds, that he is informed, that "one Connolly, using your Lord- 



14 

.ship's name, and pleading your authority, lias presumed to re-estab- 
lish the Fort al Pittsburgh, which had been demolished by the King's 
express order." He then concludes by slating, that he gives this in- 
formation so that "the facts asserted, if not true, may be contradicted 
by his Lordship's authority; but if true, which he cannot suppose, 
such steps may be taken as the King's dignity and justice shall dic- 
tate." 

The publication of this letter should have exonerated the British 
ministry from all suspicion of countenancing the scheme attributed 
to Dunmore or Connolly, of exciting ill blood and war between the 
Indians and whites. 

On the seventeenth of September, Lord Dunmore being at this 
place preparing for his expedition against the Indians, issued a pro- 
clamation, dated at Fort Dunmore, reciting that, "Whereas, the 
ancient claim laid to this country by the Colony of Virginia, founded 
upon reason, upon pre-oecupancy, and the general acquiescence of 
all persons, together with the instructions I have lately received, to 
take this country under my administration; and the evident injustice 
manifestly offered to His Majesty, by the immediate strides taken by 
the Proprietors of Pennsylvania, in prosecution of their wild claim, 
demand an immediate remedy." He then calls on all His Majesty's 
subjects West of Laurel Hill, to pay due respect to that procla- 
mation, prohibiting the execution of any act of authority on behalf 
of the province of Pennsylvania, at their peril; but, on the contrary, 
that due regard and entire obedience be paid to the laws of His 
Majesty's Colony of Virginia, &e. 

On the twelfth of October, Gov. Penn issued another proclama- 
tion, which is of too great length to be inserted here. In reply, 
however, to that portion of Lord Dunmore's proclamation, which 
speaks of the "general acquiescence of all persons" in the claim of 
Virginia, he mentions that, "in an act passed at the very last session 
of Parliament, for the government of Quebec, the Western extent 
of the Charter to Penn is fully recognized; said province being de- 
scribed as being bounded by the Northern and Western bounds of 
Pennsylvania. Wherefore there is reason to infer, that any instruc- 
tions to the Governor of Virginia, to take that country under his 
administration, must be founded on some misrepresentation respect- 
ing the Western extent of Pennsylvania." It concludes by calling 
on all persons West of Laurel Hill, to retain the settlements madp 



15 

under that province, and to pay due obedience to the laws of that 
province; and by charging all magistrates to proceed as usual in the 
administration of justice . 

On Nov. 12th, Connolly scut 0U1 B warrant for a Mr. Scott to ap- 
pear ami answer for a Dumber of offences, charged to have been com- 
mitted while acting under authority from Pennsylvania. Mr. Scott re- 
fused to pay any attention to ibis warrant; and on the same day a num- 
ber of armed men came to bis house and carried him to Fort Burd, 
now Brownsville, where he was required cither to enter into recog- 
nizance with two sureties, to appear at the next Court, to be held at 
Pittsburgh for the county of Augusta, Dec. 20th, 1774, or at any future 
day when the Court should be held there; or else be committed to 
prison. Mr. Scott gave the required bail; but I have not been able 
to ascertain the final disposition of his case; though, I presume, the 
prosecution was abandoned under the subsequent recommendation 
of the Delegates in Congress, from these two States. 

On the twenty-fourth of November, a party of armed men under 
command of Connolly, went to Hanna's town, and released two 
prisoners confined in the jail under execution. 

In January, l?7r>, information being given to the Executive Coun- 
cil, that William Crawford, the President Judge of Westmoreland 
County, had joined the Virginians in opposing the jurisdiction of 
Pennsylvania; the Council advised the Governor to supersede him 
in his office as Judge; which was done forthwith. 

On the 7th of February, another party of armed men went to Han- 
na's town, broke open the jail, and released three prisoners. Benja- 
min Harrison, a son-in-law of Crawford, commanded this party, 
Connolly having, some days before, started for Williamsburg. In 
April and May, three of the Pennsylvania magistrates were arrested 
and held in custody for performing the duties of their offices. 

The power of Lord Dunmore and his agent, Connolly, was, how- 
ever, fast drawing to a close. On the 8th of June, the former aban- 
doned his palace in Williamsburg, and took refuge on board the 
Fowey man-of-war, where soon after he was joined by Connolly, 
who was then busily engaged in planning an attack upon the West- 
ern frontier. 

The continual collisions and disorder at Pittsburgh could not fail to 
attract the attention of all the patriotic citizens of the two Stales, and 
on the 36th of .lulv, 1775, the Delegates in Congress, including 



16 

among others, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and Benjamin 
Franklin, united in a circular, urging the people in the disputed re- 
gion, to mutual forbearance. In that circular was the following lan- 
guage: — "We recommend it to yon, that all bodies of armed men, 
kept up by either parly, be dismissed: and that all those on either 
side, who are in confinement, or on bail, for taking part in the contest, 
be discharged." 

There were no armed men maintained by the Pennsylvanians; so 
that the expression about "either party," was probably only used to 
avoid the appearance of invidiousness; and Connolly and his men had 
taken effectual measures for the release of Virginians from confine- 
ment. 

On the 7th of August, the following resolution was adopted by the 

Virginia Provincial Convention, which had assembled at Williams- 
burg, on the first of that month: — 

"Resolved, That Captain John Neville be directed to march with 
his company of one hundred men, and take possession of Fort Pitt, 
and that said company be in the pay of the Colony from the time 
of their marching." 

The arrival of Captain Neville at Fort Pitt seems to have been en- 
tirely unexpected to the Pennsylvanians, and to have created consid- 
erable excitement. Commissioners appointed by Congress, were 
then here to hold a treaty with the Indians, and Mr. St. Clair, in a 
letter to John Penn, dated 17th September, has the following re- 
marks: "The treaty is not yet opened, as the Indians are not yet 

come in; but there are accounts of their being on the way, and well 
disposed. W r e have, however, been surprised by a manoeuvre of the 
people of Virginia, that may have a tendency to alter their disposition. 

" About one hundred armed men marched from Winchester, and 
took possession of the Fort on the I lth instant, which has so much 
disturbed the Delegates from the Congress, that they have thoughts 
of moving some place else to hold the treaty. 

"This step has already, as might be expected, served to exasperate 
the dispute between the inhabitants of the country, and entirely des- 
troyed the prospect of a cessation of our grievances, from the salutary 
and conciliating advice of the Delegates in their circular letter." 

There is, perhaps, some difficulty in reconciling the conduct of the 
\ irginia Convention, in ordering Captain Neville to Fort Pitt, with 
the recommendation of the Virginia and Pennsylvania Delegates in 



17 

Congress, that "all bodies of armed men in pay, of either party," 
should be discharged. No doubt, however, this only referred to bo- 
dies of armed men, kept up by the Virginians or Pennsylvanians in 
the disputed region. Mr. St. Clair seems always to have been very 
watchful of the interests of Pennsylvania during the controversy; and 
no doubt, the surprise expressed by him was unaffected; and yet there 
were strong reasons why Fort Pitt should be promptly occupied by 
troops in the confidence of the Whigs of the Revolution. The war 
for independence had commenced by the actions at Lexington and 
Bunker Hill; and Connolly, a bold, able and enterprising man, was 
busy arranging some scheme of operations, in which Fort Pitt would 
be an important and controlling position. It would seem, therefore, 
to have been nothing more than an act of ordinary prudence and fore- 
sight to send here some officer, in whose firmness, fidelity and dis- 
cretion, implicit confidence could be placed. 

Captain Neville was then about forty-three or forty-four, about the 
same age as Washington, of whom he was an early acquaintance, 
and with whom he had served twenty years previous, in Braddock's 
expedition and defeat. He had, in the preceding year, been elected 
a Delegate to the Provincial Convention, which appointed Peyton 
Randolph, George Washington and others, Delegates to the first Con- 
tinental Congress, but was prevented from attending by sickness. 

He had some time previous become an extensive land-holder in the 
vicinity of Fort Pitt, and was, of course, interested in promoting har- 
mony and good feelings in the region to which he was just bringing 
his family. 

He was a man of very frank and hearty address, of sound judg- 
ment, of much firmness and decision of character, and probably, in all 
respects, as well suited to the emergency for which he was selected, 
as any individual w ho could have been named, and who would have 
undertaken the duty. 

That he acted with great prudence and impartiality, may be infer- 
red from the fact, that after the controversy, he, for some time, repre- 
sented the disputed region in the Legislature of this State. Indeed, 
in several accounts of the Western Insurrection, in which he was a 
prominent actor, it is stated that he was very popular up to that time, 
but had then become unpopular, because he had voted in the Penn- 
sylvania Legislature against a tax on whiskey, and afterwards accep- 
ted an office for the collection of a simihn tax under the General Gov- 



18 

ei iiiiH'iit. Truly Lhis was going far for a reason for unpopularity, 
when a very plain and obvious one was so near at hand. In an insur- 
rection he adhered to the laws of the land, while a very large majority 
of the population were in open rebellion. Even in our parly con- 
tests, it rarely or never happens that any man is popular in the oppo- 
site party; surely then, it would have been strange, had John Neville 
preserved his popularity with those who sought his life and destroyed 
his property. 

As to his conduct in accepting the office, there might be very sub- 
stantial reasons for voting against a tax on whiskey in the Legisla- 
ture, which might have no weight in Congress. Besides, a Repre- 
sentative might vote against a bill even in Congress, and yet, with 
perfect propriety, assist in enforcing it when it had become a law; es- 
pecially where there was no suspicion of unconstitutionality, as in the 
case of the excise on whiskey. 

The result proved that Mr. St. Clair's fears were groundless. The 
Treaty with the Indians was not interrupted, and no disturbance oc- 
curred during Captain Neville's stay here; which, however, was not 
of long duration. After remaining here about three months, he was 
promoted and ordered to join his regiment, with which he served un- 
til May, 1780, when he became a prisoner of war, along with Lin- 
coln's army, at the surrender of Charleston. 

1 trust this passing notice of a near relative, whom I well knew, 
whom even in childhood I loved, and to whose cheerful conversation 
and well-told adventures, I have often eagerly listened, will be for- 
given. As an additional plea for indulgence, I will remark that Cap- 
tain Neville was content to serve his country openly and manfully, 
and never deemed it necessary to write a book to relate his services, 
explain his conduct, or define his position. 

On the 23d day of November, 1775, Connolly, and two of his as- 
sociates, were arrested at Fredericktown, Maryland. His connection 
with the British General, Gage, and Lord Dunmore, and the whole of 
his plans for invading the Western frontier with British troops and 
Indians, and taking possession of Fort Pitt, were fully exposed. He 
was, therefore, confined, and subsequently, by order of Congress, for 
greater security, sent to Philadelphia. His arrest and confinement 
probably broke up the whole scheme which he had prepared, and in 
which he was to be the controlling spirit! Perhaps the conviction 
that the whole affair was exploded by the arrest of Connolly, may 



19 

have induced the removal of Captain Neville from Fort Pitt, which 
took place in the ensuing month. Connolly, after the Revolution, re- 
sided in Canada; where he enjoyed the confidence and liberality of 

the English government. 

On the 18th of December, 1776, both Houses of the Legislature of 
Virginia passed a series of resolutions in relation to the disputed 
boundary, taking some new and different grounds, and making bolder 
claims than had been urged by Dunmore, or by any other person on 
the part of that State at any previous time, so far as I have seen. 

The first two resolutions are merely introductory; the third author- 
izes the Virginia Delegates in Congress, to propose a final accommo- 
dation of the dispute in manner following: — 

"That the Meridian line, drawn from the head of the Potomac to 
the North-West angle of Maryland, be extended due North, until it 
intersects the latitude of forty degrees, and from thence the Southern 
boundary shall be extended on the said fortieth degree of latitude, un- 
til the distance of five degrees of longitude from the Delaware shall 
be accomplished thereon; and from the said point, five degrees, either 
in "every point, according to the meanderings of the Delaware, or 
(which is perhaps easier and better for both,) from proper points or 
angles on the Delaware, with intermediate straight lines." 

I have now traced the history of this controversy from its origin, 
and have presented briefly, the various claims set up, and the differ- 
ent constructions given to that portion of the Charter to Penn, which 
fixed his Western and Southern boundaries. Before proceeding fur- 
ther, it may be useful to review the different interpretations, examine 
their merits, and thus be prepared to appreciate properly, the com- 
promise entered into between thcjwo States. In this review, a very 
striking feature will be the remarkable difference between the con- 
struction of the Charter by Lord Dunmore in 1774, and by the Legis- 
lature of Virginia, in 1776. Another remarkable fact is, that no one 
of the proposed lines would have thrown Pittsburgh, the bone of con- 
tention, into Virginia; so that if Virginia had taken as much pains to 
ascertain the true state of the case, as did John Penn, no controversy 
need have occurred. 

The first interpretation of the Charter is that of John Penn, in his 
letter to Dunmore. lie contended, that at the extremity of Maryland 
the boundary line of Pennsylvania should run South to the line of 
latitude 39°, being identical with "the beginning of the 10th decree" 



20 

of latitude, anil that then the Southern boundary should extend along 
that line Westward to the distance of five degrees of longitude from 
the Delaware, and that the Western boundary should be run parallel 
to the Delaware; or, in other words, distant from it five degrees in ev- 
ery corresponding part. This construction was more fully urged by 
Messrs. Tilghman and Allen, in their correspondence with Lord 
Dunmore at Williamsburg. 

The second interpreter of the Charter was Lord Dunmore. He 
scouts at the idea of a Western boundary with curves corresponding 
to the courses of the Delaware, and contends that it should be a Me- 
ridian line, beginning at the distance of five degrees of longitude 
from the Delaware river, on the Northern boundary of Pennsylvania. 

He gave the following somewhat plausible reason for starting the 
Meridian line from the Northern instead of the Southern boundary: — 
"Because the Grant directs that the survey shall begin at a point on 
the South part of the boundary and proceed Northward," &c; "and 
it being usual always, in like cases, io proceed, and extend the five 
degrees of longitude, and not return to the South point to draw it 
from thence." No doubt his Lordship thought that his government 
would be considerably extended, if his construction of the Charter 
were adopted; for he says, if my construction be the true one, then 
Fort Pitt, by the river Delaware running very much Eastwardly, to- 
wards your Northern bounds, will probably be, at least, fifty miles 
without your limits. 

He was, however, not well informed as to the geography of the 
Delaware river; there being, in fact, only fne or six miles difference 
between its longitude at the Northern and Southern limits of this 
State. Lord Dunmore does not state very explicitly his construction, 
as to the Southern boundary of Pennsylvania, though he does speak 
of "the beginning of the fortieth degree of latitude" as such. 

The only remaining formal or official construction, is that of the 
Legislature of Virginia, on the 18th of December, 1776. 

It makes the very first suggestion, so far as I have seen, that the 
boundary line should run North from the North-Western angle of 
Maryland, to the line of latitude 40° complete; then run West along 
that line to the distance of five degrees of longitude from the Dela- 
ware in that latitude, and then for the Western boundary; that John 
Penn's scheme should be adopted, or as more convenient, a number 
of straight lines should be run from prominent points of the Dela- 
ware, and the Western boundary be run parallel to those lines. 



21 



From this statement of the different interpretations, it will lie seen 
that the Legislature of Virginia utterly discarded and repudiated the 
construction taken by Lord Dunmore, as to the mode of running the 
Western boundary, and approved thai proposed by 
gesting, however, a more easy plan. Th bound ry, i: 

would seem then, was no longer a subject of difficulty in December, 
1770, Virginia having adopted the views and opinions expn 
that subject, by John Penn, three years before; but at the same time, 
she suggested an entirely new Southern boundary, and one which 
would have taken a considerable extent of valuable territory from 
Pennsylvania. 

The following Diagram will make the different propositions more 
intelligible and satisfactory: 




The plain line, thus , represents the boundary of Pennsyl- 
vania as now established. The small triangle at the North-West 
corner of the State, was ceded to the United States by New York, in 
1781, and was purchased from the General Government in L792. 

The curved and dotted line represents the boundary claimed l>\- 
John Penn. The line drawn thus is the boundary pro- 
posed by Lord Dunmore. The Virginia Legislature proposed the 



22 

line marked ihus, — o — o — , extending from the North-Wesl angle 
of Maryland to Pernn's curved line, and along thai to the Lake. 

The break like this across the South boundary of Penn- 
sylvania, is the West end of Mason and Dixon's line. 

The letters W and F, indicate the positions of Washington and 
Franklin. 

The Legislature of Virginia, by its resolutions of December 18th, 
seems indeed to have yielded the only point about which there was 
really any difficulty or doubt, and to have taken issue upon one of 
very easy solution. The expressions in the charter as to the Western 
boundary, were, " Said lands to extend Westward five degrees of 
longitude from said Eastern bounds." Now as the Eastern boundary 
was a river, some doubt might well arise on the question, whether it 
was intended that a boundary should be run, corresponding in all 
points with the sinuosities of that river. I am not mathematician 
enough to pronounce the task impracticable; but I can readily per- 
ceive that it would be exceedingly difficult and tedious ; and Lord 
Dunmore might well express strong doubt that such was the intention 
of the grantor. 

But as to the Southern boundary, there seems to be no loop to hang 
a doubt upon. "The beginning of the fortieth degree of latitude," 
arc the words. A degree is not a certain indivisible point, but some 
certain divisible space, having not only a "beginning," of which the 
charter speaks, but a termination, and that beginning and termination 
must be different. A degree of latitude is defined to be the space or 
distance on a meridian, through which an observer must pass, to vary 
his latitude by one degree, or to increase or decrease the distance of a 
star from the zenith by one degree. 

An observer under the equator would be at the "beginning" of the 
first degree: let him travel North sixty minutes of a degree, or geo- 
graphical miles, he will then be at the line marked one on the maps, 
that is, at the end of the first degree and "beginning" of the second. 
So when he arrives at the line marked 39, he will be at the end of 
latitude thirty-nine degrees and "beginning" of forty. 

That this was the understanding of that matter about that time, was 
manifest in the case of the Northern boundary which, in the same 
charter, was fixed at "the beginning of the 43d degree of latitude;" 
and no pretence was ever made of a right to go beyond the line 
marked 42. Thus if Virginia had succeeded in pushing her boundary 



23 

ui> to 40, Pennsylvania would have been < > 1 1 1 \ iwo degfees widej al- 
though her charter says from the beginning of the 40th to the begin- 1 
ning of ill- 13d degree. Moreover, if the line of 1<> were the begin- 
ning of the 40th degree, Pennsylvania, throughout the whole length 
of Maryland, lias acquired, and now holds territory South of her 
chartered limits, ami the manner of fixing the latitude of Mason and 
Dixon's hue, would serin to have been a studied transgression of the 
Southern boundary prescribed in the Charter. 

The State House in Philadelphia is in latitude 39° 56 v 53". being 
more than three geographical miles South of what the Virginia Legist 
lature called the beginning of the 10th degree," and yet Mason and 
Dixon s line was fixed at fifteen statute miles, due South of the most 
Southern point of Philadelphia. 

Both States, however, were disposed to bring the controversy to a 
close, and early in 1770, movements were made for this purpose. 

finally, George Bryan, John Ewing and David Rittenhouse, on 
the part of Pennsylvania, and Dr. James Madison, late Bishop of the 
Protestant Episcopal church, and Robert Andrews, on the part of 
Virginia, were appointed Commissioners to agree upon a boundarv. 
These gentlemen met at Baltimore on the 31st of August, 1779, and 
entered into the following agreement: 

"We (naming the Commissioners) do hereby mutually, in behalf 
of our respective States, ratify and confirm the following agreement, 
viz: To extend Mason and Dixon's line due West five degrees of 
longitude, to be computed from the river Delaware, for the Southern 
boundary of Pennsylvania, and that a Meridian, drawn from the 
Western extremity thereof, to the Northern limit of said State, be the 
Western boundary of said State forever." 

A narrative of what passed at the meeting of these Commissioners 
would, no doubt, be interesting; but I presume will never be had. 
A respected friend, in whose veracity 1 had entire confidence, has of- 
ten told me that the Virginia Delegates were willing to nave Mason 
and Dixon's line extended to the Ohio river, and that the objections 
ot George Bryan were interposed, and prevented it. I either never 
have heard, or have forgotten the authority of my informant, who is 
now dead, lor this statement. 

This agreement was ratified and confirmed by the Legislature of 
Virginia, on the 23d of June, 1780, upon certain conditions, which 

will hereafter be stated, and subsequently by the ( ieneral Assembly of 

Pennsylvania, on the 23d of September, 17RM. 



24 

Ou the 1st of April, 1784, was passed an act confirming the 
agreement entered into between this State and Virginia. The act 
begins by reciting that, whereas, Commissioners (naming them) had 
been appointed by the two States to meet and agree upon a boundary 
Line; that they had met and agreed; which agreement was, on the 
23d day of September, 1780, unanimously confirmed by this Com- 
monwealth, as follows: A resolution is then recited, stating, that 
although the conditions annexed to the ratification by Virginia, may 
tend to countenance some unwarrantable claims which may be made 
under the State of Virginia, in consequence of pretended purchases 
or settlements during the controversy, yet this Stale determining to 
give to the world the most unequivocal proof of their earnest desire 
to promote peace and harmony with a sister State, during the present 
contest with the common enemy, does agree to the conditions pro- 
posed by the Slate of Virginia, as follows: "That the private pro- 
perty and rights of all persons acquired under, founded on, or recog- 
nized by, the laws of either country, be saved and confirmed to 
them, although they should be found within the other; and that in 
the decision of disputes thereon, preference shall be given to the 
elder or prior right, whichever of the States the same shall be acquired 
under, such persons paying, within whose boundary their lands shall be 
included, the same consideration money which would have been due 
from them to the State under which they claimed the right; and 
where any such money hath, since the Declaration of Independence, 
been received by cither State for lands which, under the before- 
named agreement, falls within the other, the same shall be refunded 
and repaid; and that the inhabitants of the disputed territory now 
ceded to Pennsylvania, shall not, before the 1st of December, in the 
year 1784, be subject to the payment of any tax; nor at any time 
hereafter, to the payment of any arrears of taxes or impositions here- 
tofore laid by either State; and we do hereby accept and fully ratify 
the said recited conditions and the boundary line formed. 

The agreement of August, 1779, being thus ratified by both States, 
settled the disputed question, as to the point from which the five 
degrees of longitude were to he measured, in the manner most favor- 
to Pennsylvania. Mason and Dixon's line was to he extended 
to the distance of five degrees of longitude from the Delaware r.ver, 
in that latitude; and as that river reaches farther West in that lui.ude 
than at any oth^r point within the Northern and Southern limits of the 



25 

Stale, the boundary would, of course, extend farther West, than h 
measured from anj otto r point. 

The condition insisted upon by Virginia, in her ratification of an 
agreement entered into by her own enlightened Coin icms 

to have been unreasonable, or at all events, it was not reciprocal; be- 
cause there were no claims under Pennsylvania, outside of the boun- 
dary agreed 14)011, and many persons who had honestly purchased or 
settled under this State, in Westmoreland, Fayette and Washington 
counties, were deprived o{' their possessions by claimants under Vir- 
ginia. Much valuable land within our present county of Allegheny, 
is held by Virginia titles. 

This question being settled, it was now only necessary to mark 
upon the gronnd the boundaries agreed upon. 

On the 21s1 of February, 1781, the Presidenl and Council of 
Pennsylvania, in pursuance of authority vested in them by General 
ably, appointed John Lukens and Archibald McClean, of York 
county, to extend Mason and Dixon's line to the extent of five de- 
grees of longitude, from the river Delaware. Under this appoint- 
ment, nothing appears to have been done, and on the Oth of April, 
1782, Archibald McClean was appointed again. On the 19th of 
February, 1783, a letter from McClean, inclosing a report of the pro- 
ceedings ot himself and Virginia Commissioners, was read in the 
Executive Council. They had extended .Mason and Dixon's line, and 
run a Meridian line from its termination to the Ohio river. This line 
however, only Looked upon as a temporary one, and notwith- 
standing its completion, controversies and mutual recrimination con- 
tinued. Virginians within the limits of this State, as settled by the 
temporary line, made complaints to the Governor of Virginia, that the 
conditions upon which that Slate had acceded to the line, had been 
departed from. These complaints wire transmitted to the Supreme 
Executive Council of Pennsylvania. The Council submitted them 
to the Assembly; a Committee of which body, alter full investigation, 
pronounced them groundless, and recommended that measures be ta- 
ken to establish the boundary line permanently. 

For this desirable purpose, each State selected the best and most 
suitable men within its reach; so that their work, when completed, 
would merit and secure entire confidence in its necuracv. 

The Commissioners on the part of Pennsylvsn! David Rit- 

•enhousr. John Jaiken- Jol rlutchins; and 



20 

those on the pari of Virginia were, Andrew Ellicot, (who then resi- 
ded in Maryland,) Bishop Madison, the Rev. Mr. Robert Andrews, 
and T. Page. These gentlemen performed the duly assigned them, 

in the summer and fall of 1784. 

The Southern boundary of the State being thus extended to its 
Western extremity, it only remained to run a .Meridian line from that 
point to the Ohio river, to close the controversy with Virginia. This 
task was committed to Messrs. Rittenhouse and Porter, from Penn- 
sylvania, and Andrew Ellicot and Joseph Neville, from Virginia; 
who entered upon their work in May, 1784, and on the 23d of Aug- 
ust, united in the following report: — 

"We, the subscribers, Commissioners, appointed by the States of 
Pennsylvania and Virginia, to ascertain the boundary between said 
States, do certify, that we have carried on a Meridian line from the 
South- West corner of Pennsylvania, Northward to the river Ohio; 
and marked it by cutting a wide vista over all the principal hills, in- 
tersected by the said line, and by falling or deadening a line of trees, 
generally, through all the lower grounds. And we have likewise 
placed stones, marked on the East side P., and on the West side V., 
on the most of the principal hills, and where the line strikes the 
Ohio; which stones are accurately placed in the true Meridian, bound- 
ing the States as aforesaid." 

Persons traveling on the Pittsburgh and Steubenvilie turnpike road, 
may see one of the stones a short distance West of Paris, and about 
thirty miles West of Pittsburgh. 

"Virginia having on the 1st of March, 1784, ceded to the United 
States all her right to the territory North of the Ohio river, had no 
special interest in extending the boundary of Pennsylvania farther 
North. The boundary was extended to Lake Erie the ensuing year, 
by Messrs. Porter and McClain. 

Having thus traced this controversy from its origin, and having, I 
fear, exhausted the patience of my audience, I shall now give a 
brief notice of the operation which each of the schemes for fixing the 
boundary, would have had upon the States. 

Had the proposition of John Penn been acted upon, Pennsylvania 
would have extended over the whole of Preston, Monongalia and 
Marion, a large part of Harrison, and portions of Lewis, Randolph 
and Marshall counties, Va.; and on the other hand, she would have 
lost the whole of the Irrrilorv ol Beaver and Meivei counties, nine- 



27 

teen-twentieths ol Washington, portions ol Green, Fayette, West- 
moreland, Butler, Venango, Crawford, Erie, and two-fifths of Alle- 
gheny. The townships of Jefferson, Upper St. ('lair, Fayette, Moon 
and Finley, would have passed to Virginia, with portions of Eliza- 
beth, Mifflin, Lower St. Clair and Robinson. A large portion of Ohio 
township and a portion of Ross, together with all those entire coun- 
ties and parts of counties North of the Ohio river, though lost to 
Pennsylvania, would not have been gained by Virginia, but would 
have passed to the United States, by the cession of 1st March, 1784, 
and would, of course, now belong to the State of Ohio. The plan of 
the Virginia Legislature would have taken from Pennsylvania all that 
she would have lost under Penn's project, with the addition of the 
residue of Greene county, and about two-thirds more of Fayette. 

Lord Dunmore's project is not very plain, as to the Southern limit 
of this State. He speaks of the beginning of the 40th degree of 
latitude, but whether he meant the 39° or 40°, is not obvious; for 
he does not say whether the line should run North or South Jrom the 
North-West angle of Maryland. In the one case, his Sou them boun- 
dary of Pennsylvania would have been the same as that of John 
Penn; in the other case, it would have been identical with that of the 
Virginia Legislature, to Penn's curved line. But as Gov. Penn, in 
his letter of the 31st of March, 1774, stated very distinctly to his 
Lordship, the claim of the Proprietaries of Pennsylvania, to run South 
along the Western line of Maryland to the beginning of the 40th de- 
gree, and as his Lordship did never, so far as I have seen, controvert 
that claim, we may infer that he understood the words, "beginning 
of the 40th degree," to mean the line of 39 degrees. 

His Western boundary would have cut off from Pennsylvania a 
strip of land four or five miles wide, and extending from the Southern 
boundary to the Lake. 

The compromise of August, 1779, seems to have been a very fair 
and reasonable one. Pennsylvania abandoned her claim to the paral- 
lelogram between Mason and Dixon's line extended, on the North, 
and "the beginning" of latitude 40 on the South, and from the \\ , 3 | 
line of Maryland Westward, to the extent of five degrees from the 
Delaware, being about 54 miles long and 50 miles wide. On the 
other hand, she gamed, to the Weal of Penn's curved line, about an 
equal extent of better land. 

Both States secured more compact territories than either of the 



28 

plans proposed by Lord Dunmore, John Penn, or the Virginia Legis- 
lature would have given lliem; and Pennsylvania especially, has ob 
tained the exclusive dominion of the Ohio river for more than forty 

miles; instead of having the States of Virginia and Ohio cornering 
within six miles of our city. 'J hi », by the Compro- 

mise, gained the territory along the Big Beaver river, through which 
the Canals to Erie and Cleveland extend. 

A few brief remarks upon the statements of Mr. Barton, in his life 
of Rittenhouse, and of Judge Brackenridge, in his short chapter, will 
conclude this Lecture, which has already been extended beyond rav 
expectations. 

Mr. Barton, in a note to his work, says — "The difference between 
Mason and Dixon's line and 'the beginning of the fortieth degree of 
latitude,' was gained by Mr. Penn, as far as Maryland extended, in 
consequence of a compromise with Lord Baltimore, whereby the 
latter gained some advantage." "Some advantage," is certainly a 
very loose expression for the biographer of an eminent mathematician; 
£/{, but wheft that author asserted that Penn, with the younger grant, 
had gained something from an older grantee, it became necessary to 
assume that the latter had gained elsewhere, in return, "some advan- 
tage;" but it was impossible to lay a finger upon that advantage. 
A loose expression was, therefore, the only resource left. The truth 
is, that Penn's Charter would have entitled him to go South to lati- 
tude 39° being the beginning of latitude 40°; but the older grant to 
Lord Baltimore prevailed, and Penn lost the strip of land from lati- 
tude 39° to Mason and Dixon's line, throughout the whole length of 
Maryland. Thus Pennsylvania, instead of being three degrees wide, 
as the Charter and the Minutes of Council at the time show it was 
intended to be, was only a little more than two degrees in width. 

Again, in the same note, Mr. Barton says, — "The boundary line 
between Pennsylvania and Virginia was continued due West from 
the North-West angle of Maryland; instead of then coming hack to 
the 40° of North latitude; by virtue of an agreement by which the 
former relinquished her right to run her Western boundary parallel 
to the meanderings of the Delaware." I think I have shown satis- 
factorily, that Penn's Southern boundary, according to his Charter, 
was the line of latitude 39°; so that it was Pennsylvania, and not 
Virginia, who j ielded in the location of the Southern boundary. As 
I,, the Western boundary, the Legislature of Virginia, in December, 



29 

1770, had acceded to the curved boundary proposed by Perm. The 
true terms and spirit of the compromise of l??'-< were as follow: — 
Pennsylvania relinquished her claim to the territory South of Mason 
and Dixon's line, and Virginia agreed thai the five degrees of longi- 
tude should l"' measured front the most Western point on the Dela- 
ware; thus compensating Pennsylvania lor what she lost South of 
Mason and Dixon's line extended. 

Judge Brackenridge differs entirely from Mr. Barton, in his ac- 
count of the matter. He says, — "He (Penn) had a right to run 
South, at the extremity of Maryland, a degree." "Then a line due 
Wesl to the extremity of the tilth degree of longitude from the Dela- 
ware. " This is correctly stated, except as to the distance Penn had 
a right to run South, which was really ahout fifty statute miles, not 
"a degree." Again the Judge says, — "There was in dispute with 
Virginia, a degree of latitude lor the distance of twenty-three miles 
due West, after passing the Charter boundary of Maryland. The 
disputed territory South of Mason and Dixon's line, extended due 
West not twenty-three, hut about fifty-four miles?"*" The Judge's 
mistake probably occured in this way. From the end of Mason and 
Dixon's line to the South-West corner of Pennsylvania, is about 
twenty-three miles. This was run by Rittenhouse and his col- 
leagues; and the Judge probably had personal knowledge of their 
work, and perhaps supposed that Mason and Dixon's line termi- 
nated at the North-West corner of Maryland. 

Wain the Judge says. — "Pennsylvania claimed a line North par- 
allel with the Delaware, but not according to the curves. Virginia 
claimed according to the curves; the sinuosities of which river would 
throw considerable bays into Virginia.* 

All who have heard this Lecture, may recollect that John Penn. 
as well as Messrs. Tilghman and Allen, claimed according to the 
curves of the Delaware} that Lord Dunmore insisted upon a meri- 
dian line; and that it was not until the close of 177f>. that Virginia 
acceded to the proposition of a crooked Western boundary. 

I have thus given a history of the rise, progress and final settle- 
ment of that controversy, which was once the subject of deep and 
exciting interest, in tins section of country. In giving ibis narra- 
tive, 1 have labored to make it as brief as the dispute, extending 
through many years, would admit, and as plain and intelligible as 



30 

the short space of an evening Lecture would allow. I have aimed 
at no ornament; but have endeavored to give a distinct knowledge 
of a stirring incident in our early history; an incident which merits 
preservation from oblivion, if not as a warning to our different States 
not recklessly to enter into controversies with each other, at least as 
a proud example of wisdom, moderation and patriotism, in its final 
settlement; an example which every patriot may fervently desire to 
see imitated, in all future collisions between the various States of 
our beloved Union. 



